Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Heck, a bone spur in his foot (he forgot which one) was so severe that Donald JOHN Trump could not go to Vietnam and kill hundreds, if not thousands, of Viet Cong.
If not for the bone spur...........
They did more than kill Viet cong, they also killed Farmers, laborers, North Vietnamese, and even south Vietnamese (but of course you never heard about the last one).
There is a thing called empathy. People who have it can't help but be disturbed by human suffering, regardless whether the person suffering is "good" or "bad."
What if the person being tortured caused untold levels of human suffering?
Yeah, I know most here will say torture of any kind is bad, but at the same time, say a group of people managed to get ahold of someone like Kim Jong Un and tortured him relentlessly for months having him undergo the worst pain possible until he finally died, would you honestly at all feel bad for him?
So, if someone kills your entire family in front of you, but leaves you unharmed and then starts to walk away, you're just going to let them walk?
A.) That is not the scenario at hand, the scenario at hand is capturing individuals who they have no proof have done anything and causing intense pain to them, that isn't done for the sake of others, that is done because you enjoy it.
B.) Self defense is one thing, calling the police or trying to get them detained is another, wanting to beat said person to a pulp while they are no threat to you is a violent act with no morality behind it.
Once Americans learn these basic moral rules, they learn that bombing a country to the ground is not an appropriate or necessary act.
Torturing the enemy sounds like fun until one of our own gets imprisoned by the enemy and they return the favor
So no, we can't torture people because we don't want our own POWs tortured, ever.
That was the logic that prevailed in long past wars but does it really apply today? Enemies like IS will torture people regardless.
A better reason not to torture is simply because it's wrong. It's about the worst thing human beings can do. I would concede rare exceptions to that policy, like the need to extract information from a known terrorist to prevent an imminent attack. But torture can never be justified simply because it gives (some of) us satisfaction to do it to people we hate.
So, if someone kills your entire family in front of you, but leaves you unharmed and then starts to walk away, you're just going to let them walk?
If you had the power to do something, you would of course try to prevent your family from being killed by whatever means necessary.
If you found out after the fact, killing the killer would be just, but torturing him would not be, unless the killer had used torture himself. Even then, it might not be worth the temporary satisfaction of getting revenge. Allowing yourself to descend to that level of depravity might do long term damage to you own psyche.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
